Mobile Phone Contract - Price Rise Refunds

starsailor123uk

sunshinerise111 wrote: »

Suceeds in part !!!!

2. I direct that the company shall: cancel the customer’s contract without imposing a cancellation charge, backdating such cancellation to 22nd May 2014, thereby waiving charges (if any) incurred after this date and shall provide the customer with his PAC; and pay the customer compensation in the sum of £25.00.
.

CISAS are incredible or is it that some of their arbritatiors can understand plain english in contracts ... As above backdating thereby waiving charges incurred after that date.

Swampsnake

sunshinerise111 wrote: »

Decision

1. The claim succeeds in part.
2. I direct that the company shall: cancel the customer’s contract without imposing a cancellation charge, backdating such cancellation to 22nd May 2014, thereby waiving charges (if any) incurred after this date and shall provide the customer with his PAC; and pay the customer compensation in the sum of £25.00.

starsailor123uk wrote: »

CISAS are incredible or is it that some of their arbritatiors can understand plain english in contracts ... As above backdating thereby waiving charges incurred after that date.

I think it's good the arbitrator is putting it in black and white what he expects EE to do. I'm not surprised EE are trying any tactic to keep some money from the people who have escaped.

If I'm lucky enough to be able to join them then I can live with the £90 or so I will have spent since this has started, although any chance to get those extra pennies from them would be good.

As an aside I was hoping to hear who will be adjudicating my case today. My reply to EE's defence went in last weekend so the 5 days are up today. I guess they are a little busy!

RandomCurve

starsailor123uk wrote: »

I think that will be the crux of whether I take it to the SCC.

The difference is between what was put in the decision that ws made which was termination backdated to 4th March and what they are now saying is what they meant which is completely different

Whether the SCC would seek a clear application of the decision made and the terms used or take the view that CISAS meant something different and that is what has been applied (i.e an error was made and you can't claim through SCC for that!) I'm not sure ... DO I gamble £25 at effective odds of 5-1

I have emailled the Lynn Harper @ OFCOM with all my details but that was more about making OFCOM aware of CISAS poor perfromance and Orange/EE disappointing tactics and that the current arbitration process is , IMHO , at best not fit for purpose or at worst significantly weighted to the TELCOs advantage!

Lynn Parker at Ofcom?
I would take those odds - but I would fight for even if it was a penny because of the principle of the thing.


Before SCC I think an official compliant to CISAS/Ofcom is likely to get to you somewhere, as this is clearly NOT a minor clerical error, it is re-interpretation of what back dated means! Have CISAS responded to any of the points made at post #1233?

RandomCurve

starsailor123uk wrote: »

CISAS are incredible or is it that some of their arbritatiors can understand plain english in contracts ... As above backdating thereby waiving charges incurred after that date.

Hopefully some of the adjudicators are upset with EE interfering with due process and don't want their decisions "overturned".
I guess if I was CISAS and I had the full weight of the EE legal team (albeit inept) threating expensive litigation (paid for by the £7.5m per month gained for an "illegal" price rise) versus you and me who can only complain I might have buckled too (but I would like to think that I had more integrity than that)!

starsailor123uk

RandomCurve wrote: »

Lynn Parker at Ofcom?
I would take those odds - but I would fight for even if it was a penny because of the principle of the thing.


Before SCC I think an official compliant to CISAS/Ofcom is likely to get to you somewhere, as this is clearly NOT a minor clerical error, it is re-interpretation of what back dated means! Have CISAS responded to any of the points made at post #1233?

No - They sent the response earlier in the thread and effectively hung up the phone on me as they claimed Rule 8b as a reason for not answering them which at best is hypocritical! as they did exactly that for Orange/EE

starsailor123uk

RandomCurve wrote: »

Lynn Parker at Ofcom?
I would take those odds - but I would fight for even if it was a penny because of the principle of the thing.


Before SCC I think an official compliant to CISAS/Ofcom is likely to get to you somewhere, as this is clearly NOT a minor clerical error, it is re-interpretation of what back dated means! Have CISAS responded to any of the points made at post #1233?

http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/lynn-parker/5/5b4/8a6

Director of Consumer Protection

philjp0

Firstly thanks to RC for all the hard work - hope you are feeling better!

I have been following the thread closely but lurking in the background!!

Another loss here I am afraid - been busy but I received it on June 24 and had adjudicator DMC who reading the thread has previous!! Just my luck!!

It appears some were considering a further claim under T&C or SCC - I cant seem to work out what happened to either of these - did they die a death?

If they have other than send a snotty email to CISAS pointing out the inconsistencies in their judgements is there anything else i can do?

thanks Phil.

pau1200

CISAS has just emailed me back regarding the backdating, they have left me fuming, email below.

Dear Mr notbotheredasyournotEE

Further to the company’s request for clarification in the above case, please see below the adjudicator’s response:

‘‘There was no specific claim for a refund of charges in the application or the quantification of any refund. If the customer used the services of the company then clearly the customer is not entitled to any refund. If however the customer ceased all use of the service from the day he was entitled to have the contract terminated then it would be reasonable for the company to refund any charges as the customer demonstrated that he regarded the contract as terminated.’

We trust the above clarifies our final response.

I guess final means go f**k yourself

Pilotmic

philjp0 wrote: »

Firstly thanks to RC for all the hard work - hope you are feeling better!

I have been following the thread closely but lurking in the background!!

Another loss here I am afraid - been busy but I received it on June 24 and had adjudicator DMC who reading the thread has previous!! Just my luck!!

It appears some were considering a further claim under T&C or SCC - I cant seem to work out what happened to either of these - did they die a death?

If they have other than send a snotty email to CISAS pointing out the inconsistencies in their judgements is there anything else i can do?

thanks Phil.

Still looking at SCC, tried the T&C attempt but they blocked it. All further correspondence not answered. Ofcom advised especially regarding their guidance. I honestly wonder why these people are supposed to be representing us. EE have given me their full and final words on the matter regardless of any questions I had unanswered. Out attempts seem to have stalled at present but no way we are giving up!

ulaggy

Pilotmic wrote: »

Still looking at SCC, tried the T&C attempt but they blocked it. All further correspondence not answered. Ofcom advised especially regarding their guidance. I honestly wonder why these people are supposed to be representing us. EE have given me their full and final words on the matter regardless of any questions I had unanswered. Out attempts seem to have stalled at present but no way we are giving up!

I haven't gone back to CISAS yet after my loss. I've just been waiting. RC says that he is waiting to hear back from MSE as to whether they want to get involved in a big push or something.

I'm still looking to progress this to the SCC, but won't be doing it without proper guidance. Hopefully MSE will say something soon!